slides - Cumulative Impact of Industry and NRC Actions
slides - Cumulative Impact of Industry and NRC Actions
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
The success of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program of the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) is critical to U.S. ability to manage and dispose of
nuclear waste safely--and to the reestablishment of confidence in the nuclear energy
option in the United States. The program must conform with all applicable standards
and, in fact, set the example for a national policy on the safe disposal of radioactive
waste.
The Secretary of Energy has recently completed an extensive review of the
Goal: Secure the Benefits, Limit the Risk
The extent to which nuclear power will be a broadly accepted option for meeting future global energy needs depends upon cost, safety, waste management and the ability to limit the associated proliferation risks. While all four considerations are important, this report exclusively examines proliferation risks.
The paper discusses issues and options for improving the budgeting and financial management
of the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF). The issues and options would facilitate implementation of
any changes in program scope and content, or any changes in organization and management
structure. .
The three issues for possible administrative action include:
1. Instituting financial management enhancements to foster multi-year budgeting and
appropriations; combined accrual and cash budgeting; and separate capital budgeting;
This analysis is prepared by the Mined Geologic Disposal System (MGDS) Waste Package Development Department (WPDD) in response to a request received via a QAP-3-12 Design Input Data Request (Reference 5.1) from Waste Acceptance, Storage, & Transportation (WAST) Design (formerly MRSMPC Design). This design analysis is an answer to the Design Input Data Request to provide: Specific requirements for long-term criticality control.
The main question before the Transportation and Storage Subcommittee was whether the United States
should change its approach to storing and transporting spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level
radioactive waste (HLW) while one or more permanent disposal facilities are established.
To answer this question and to develop specific recommendations and options for consideration by the
full Commission, the Subcommittee held multiple meetings and deliberative sessions, visited several
America’s nuclear waste management program is at an impasse. The Obama Administration’s decision
to halt work on a repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is but the latest indicator of a policy that has
been troubled for decades and has now all but completely broken down. The approach laid out under
the 1987 Amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA)—which tied the entire U.S. high-level
waste management program to the fate of the Yucca Mountain site—has not worked to produce a
This report evaluates the potential for directly disposing of licensed commercial Dual Purpose
Canisters (DPCs) inside waste package overpacks without reopening. The evaluation considers
the principal features of the DPC designs that have been licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) as these relate to thedesigns of waste packages and as they relate to
disposability in a repository in unsaturated volcanic tuff. Where DPC features appear to compromise future disposability in an unsaturated tuff (e.g., Yucca Mountain) repository
Dear Mr. President:
At your direction, the Secretary of Energy established the Blue Ribbon Commission on
America’s Nuclear Future to review policies for managing the back end of the nuclear
fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy. We are pleased to be serving as Co‐
Chairmen of the Commission, and we are writing to you to highlight an important action
we strongly believe should be reflected in your Fiscal Year 2013 baseline budget
projections.
In our draft report to the Secretary, issued in July of this year, the Commission
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
It is increasingly apparent that the United States will require a large expansion of nuclear power
generation capacity to meet its future baseload electricity needs while reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. As a result, Congress and the Administration must act to update U.S. nuclear fuel
cycle policy to address these realities. This will likely require a multifaceted approach involving
some combination of on-site/centralized dry cask interim storage, nuclear fuel recycling, and
emplacement of high-level wastes in long-term geological storage.
The Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste is a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel1 and high-level radioactive waste from civilian nuclear power generation, defense, national security and other activities.
The characteristics of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste are described, and options for permanent disposal that have been considered are described. These include:
•disposal in a mined geological formation,
•disposal in a multinational repository, perhaps on an unoccupied island,
•by in situ melting, perhaps in underground nuclear test cavities,
•sub-seabed disposal,
•disposal in deep boreholes,
•disposal by melting through ice sheets or permafrost,
•disposal by sending the wastes into space, and
The United States currently has no place to dispose of the high-level radioactive waste
resulting from the production of the nuclear weapons and the operation of nuclear
electronic power plants. The only option under formal consideration at this time is to place
the waste in an underground geologic repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. However,
there is strong public debate about whether such a repository could protect humans from
the radioactive waste that will be dangerous for many thousands of years. This book
In General: The Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2013 includes most of the language of S.3469, the Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2012. The most significant change in the 2013 bill is the provision linking construction and siting of a consolidated storage facility to progress on a repository. The 2012 Act prohibited storage of any spent nuclear fuel beyond 10,000 metric tons until the Administration concluded a repository consent agreement.
The purpose of this study is to assist decision makers in evaluating the centralized interim
storage option. We explore the economics of centralized interim storage under a wide variety of
circumstances. We look at how a commitment to move forward with centralized interim storage
today could evolve over time. And, we evaluate the costs of reversing a commitment toward
centralized storage if it turns out that such a decision is later considered a mistake. We have not
In response to the remand of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Minnesota v. NRC, 602 F.2d 412 (1979)), and as a continuation of previous proceedings conducted in this area by NRC (44 Fed. Reg. 61,372), the Commission initiated a generic rulemaking proceeding on October 25, 1979.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (NWPA), establishes a process for the siting, construction and operation of one or more national repositories for permanent disposal of the Nation’s spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). In 1987, after the Department of Energy (the Department or DOE) had conducted studies of nine potential repository sites located throughout the United States, Congress amended the NWPA and selected the Yucca Mountain site in Nye County, Nevada as the only site for further study for the first national repository.
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013